city and utility water conservation strategies · city and utility water conservation strategies...
Post on 03-Aug-2018
221 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Potential City and Utility Strategies
• Reducing water loss• Accelerated reclaimed water use• Wet ponds, ornamental ponds, and green roofs• Changes in the billing structure/water rates to encourage
conservation• Wholesale customers• Alternative water sources• Conservation in City facilities • Pressure reduction• Winter leak detection• Enhanced public education program
Reducing Utility Water LossProblem:• Water loss could be improved with substantial system
benefits• Customers are frustrated about the length of time to
repair priority 3 leaks when they are being asked to conserve water
• The Utility does not currently have a comprehensive leak detection program, so underground leaks that do not surface continue to contribute to overall water loss
• Current water meter testing program results in revenue losses and higher water use
• Lack of funding for priority one water main rehabilitation
FY05 AWU Water Audit Results
Billed Water (Revenue
Water)84.2%
Meters4.4%
Real Loss 9.3%
Billing, Theft, Dept. Use
2.1%
AWWA Standard for Well-Run Utility <10% Real Loss
Utility Strategies Reducing Water Loss
• Leak Detection Contract– Approved by Council on October 19th
– Finding leaks that have not yet surfaced– 600 linear miles of pipe– Will focus initially on cast iron pipe
• RFB for a Large Meter Testing & Repair Contract– Test approximately 500 meters (3” – 10”)– Will focus on meters that have not been tested in the last 5 years
• Current focus on repairing leaks in shorter time frame (priority 3 leaks) – Utility currently working to reduce the time to repair leaks to
within 7 days– Service contract to provide back up support for Field Operations
personnel during peak repair demand times out for bids
Utility Strategies Reducing Water Loss
• Staff Recommendation:– Annual contract for large meter testing and
repair – Annual contract for small meter exchanges– Annual contract for leak detection services
*Programs could be through contracts or hiring additional FTEs
Utility Strategies Reducing Water Loss
• Projected water savings for the City:– Peak Day Water Savings: 4.8 MGD
• Estimated Cost:– Cost to the City per year: $600,000– Cost per gallon saved: $1.25
Reclaimed Water UseAssured CIP Funding
Problem:• Additional funding of the reclaimed water
program in the Utility’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is required in the short-term in a time of large capital demands.
• The reclaimed water program grows through the conversion of large volume potable water customers.
• Transmission main extensions are required to bring water to existing potable water customers
Reclaimed Water Use (CIP)UT Transmission Main
• 13,000 feet of 24” main along Red River• Potential customers: UT, Hancock Golf Course,
Hancock Shopping Center, St. David’s Hospital, redeveloped Concordia site
Reclaimed Water Use (CIP) ABIA Transmission Main
• 6,100 feet of 12” main from Hornsby Bend to the Bergstrom Airport
• Potential customers: ABIA, Hilton Hotel, rental car companies, airport support facilities
Reclaimed Water Use (CIP)Smith Road Extension
• 10,000 feet of 8” & 12” main• Potential customers: Govalle Park, Johnston High
School, Allan Elementary School, Texas School for the Deaf, Whole Foods Warehouses, etc.
Reclaimed Water Use (CIP)Main to Colorado River Park
• 16,000 feet of 24” main• Potential customers: Roy G. Guerrero Colorado River
Park, Civitan Park, Allison Elementary School, ACC Riverside, Montopolis Recreation Center, etc.
Reclaimed Water UseAssured CIP Funding
• Staff Recommendation:– Approve funding for additional projects in the Utility’s
Capital Improvement Plan starting in 2007 and completed in 2011:
• UT Transmission Main• ABIA Transmission Main• Smith Road Extension• Main to the Roy G. Guerrero Colorado River Park• 24” Rehabilitation• 12” Rehabilitation• 183 Rehabilitation
Reclaimed Water UseAssured CIP Funding
• Projected water savings for the City:– Peak Day Water Savings: 4 - 8 MGD
• Estimated Cost to the City:– One-time capital costs: $12.5 million– Cost per gallon saved: $1.50 - $3.00
Utility Water Rates
(1) Residential Water Rates(2) Irrigation Water Rates(3) Commercial, Multi-family Water Rates(4) Wholesale Water Rates
Utility Water Bills
Problem:• Utility bills for the City of Austin lack specific
information that could further conservation efforts
Utility Water Rates(cost per thousand gallons)
$6.91Over 15,001 gallons
$3.889,001 – 15,000 gallons
$2.302,001 – 9,000 gallons
$0.880 - 2,000 gallonsSingle Family
$3.19Multi-family
$3.53Industrial
$3.84Commercial
Peak UseJuly 1 through October 31 bills
Utility Water Rates
Problem:• Current water rate structure does not provide
adequate conservation price signals for high use residential customers, irrigation accounts, or commercial/multi-family customers
Additional Information:• A 1% increase in real water rates will cause a
0.1 - 0.2% decrease in water use • Cost-of-service study and possible change in
billing system in the next few years
Utility Water RatesSolutions:• Residential Customers:
– Fifth Tier for Residential Customers exceeding 25,000 gallons per month (or other amount determined through the cost of service study)
• Multi-family/Commercial Irrigation Use:– Implement an increasing block rate structure for irrigation water
use (irrigation only meters), with the end point being the same as the highest residential block rate (or other amount determined through the cost of service study)
– Require properties without irrigation meters and with a site plan of more than 10,000 square feet to retrofit with irrigation meters
• Multi-family, Commercial, and Residential Customers:– Implement a water budgets rate structure that will provide
customers with monthly water budgets tailored to reflect their water needs. If a customer uses more water than their monthly water budget, they will pay a higher rate for the extra water. This rate structure would be designed to encourage water conservation while at the same time budgeting sufficient water for that specific customer's needs.
Utility Water RatesWater Budget Information (all customers)
• Water budgeting for all customers (example)– The City of Boulder Utility mailed letters to all their water customers
displaying their estimated monthly water budgets for 2007. The letters compare the customer's estimated monthly water budgets to their actual water use from the past 12 months.
– In January of 2007, Boulder will implement a new rate structure that uses water budgets to calculate monthly water bills. With the new rate structure, each customer will get a monthly water budget that is tailored to reflect their water needs.
– If a customer uses more water than their monthly water budget, they will pay a higher rate for the extra water. This rate structure is designed to encourage water conservation while at the same time, budgeting sufficient water for that specific customer's needs.
– Allow sufficient lead time for extensive public education prior to implementation of higher excess use surcharges.
– Other examples: Irvine Ranch, CA water budgets, Albuquerque, NM excess use surcharges
Utility Water RatesRecommendation:• Conduct a cost of service study
– Identify effective conservation strategies • Fifth tier for residential customers • Water budgeting rate for all customers • Conservation rate structures for wholesale customers• Establish irrigation rates (evaluate charging irrigation
customers what residential customers pay for the highest residential block rate)
• Any new rate that would require significant changes to the billing system would not take place until 2011
Utility Water Rates
• Projected water savings:• Peak day water savings: 2.5 – 5.3 MGD
• Estimated costs:• Cost per gallon saved: $0
Utility Water RatesWholesale Customers
Problem:• Some large wholesale water customers have
high per capita water useSolution:• Add conservation rate structures to the new
wholesale contracts as each contract expires • Cost of service study should assess feasibility of
implementing water conservation rate structures for wholesale customers
Average Per Capita Water Use 2003-2004 Based on AWU Data
0 50 100
150
200
250
300
350
400
NighthawkMarsha WSC
High Valley
North Austin MUDShady Hollow MUD
Anderson Mill MUDAustin
Wells Branch MUD
Lost Creek MUDWCID 10
Rivercrest
Gallons/Person/Day
Wholesale Customers
Recommendation:• Follow-up on contracts that require water
conservation measures to be implemented• Ask customers whose contracts don’t require
conservation to implement conservation measures
• Ensure new contracts require conservation measures comparable to what the City has in place
Utility Water Bills• Recommendation:
– Add a bar chart to the current bill to show historical and current water use if feasible with the current billing system
– New billing system must have water budget capabilities and be able to include additional conservation information (per capita water use, graphic illustrations of water use, conservation tips, watering days)
– Automatic system that alerts a customer through email if consumption increases by more than 100 percent (currently, AE generates reports if bills are 4.5 times higher than normal consumption—meter is re-read)
Wet Ponds, Ornamental Ponds and Green Roofs
Problem:• Wet ponds can require millions of gallons of
potable water to survive the summer months• Commercial ornamental ponds can waste
potable water just for aesthetic purposes• Green roofs have the potential to be a sizable
additional demand on the water system
Wet Ponds, Ornamental Ponds and Green Roofs
Recommendation:• Prohibit the use of potable water to maintain new
wet ponds, commercial ornamental ponds, and green roofs
Wet Ponds, Ornamental Ponds and Green Roofs
• Projected water savings: • Peak day water use savings after ten
years: 0.3• Estimated costs:
• Cost to the City: $0• Cost per gallon saved: $0
Alternative Water SourcesProblem:• Rainwater, stormwater, industrial process water, and a/c
condensate are not always being captured and reused• Stormwater regulations are not optimized for beneficial
reuse of storm water for irrigation– Current regulations focus on flood reduction & pollutant
removal via short-term (< 72 hour) storage– Landscape irrigation with stormwater requires longer-term
storage– Most stormwater ponds not required to re-irrigate: water
discharged directly to waterways– The few retention-irrigation systems usually discharge to
areas that don’t require supplemental irrigation• Centralized wastewater collection can be costly in
outlying areas
Alternative Water SourcesDecentralized Wastewater Distribution
Solution:• Wastewater could be treated onsite and reused• Cost effectiveness analysis not developed• Pilot projects needed to assess feasibility- need
voluntary participation from one or more developers
• Should not be encouraged in the Drinking Water Protection Zone
Alternative Water SourcesAC condensate
Recommendation:• Air conditioning systems required to drain AC
condensate to a common drain in new commercial construction– Can be used in cooling towers or as irrigation– Estimated annual condensate produced from
one 400 ton system – 53,625,000 gallons or 165 AF per system
Alternative Water SourcesStormwater Re-irrigation
Recommendation: • Require re-irrigation of stormwater that can be
beneficially used on maintained landscape• Require enlargement of stormwater collection or
water quality ponds for re-irrigation of non-potable water
1. Spray irrigation to juniper forest
Retention irrigation
ponds
2. Spray irrigation to landscaping throughout
Two Approaches to Retention-Irrigation
Alternative Water SourcesIndustrial Process Water
Solution:• Samsung will have large streams of
relatively clean industrial process water that could be reused locally
• Explore the possibility of local reuse in this area
Alternative Water Sources
• Projected Water Savings:• Peak day water savings (after ten years): 2.4 MGD
• Estimated Cost:• Cost to the City: $30,000 per year• Cost per gallon saved: $0.13• Additional cost to the developer: additional
excavation costs of approximately $10 per cubic foot of soil or $20 per cubic foot of rock
City Facility Conservation Requirements
Problem:• Citizens look to the City to lead by example in
conserving water• There are opportunities for City facilities to take
advantage of available conservation techniques• Lack of accountability for water use by youth
athletic associations – Lack of conservation– Water is currently paid for by the City
City Facility Conservation Requirements
Recommendations:• Require water conservation elements as
part of the LEEDs certification program for new City facilities
• Complete the retrofit of City plumbing fixtures
City Facility Conservation Requirements
• Require all athletic fields to have to pay for water above a pre-determined water budget amount
• Fund later stages of raw water project at Zilker and Butler – Would switch from potable water use to raw water at the Barton
Springs pool area, softball fields, and flag football fields– Approximately 200 acres remain to be funded
• Follow through with water efficiency recommendations from the current performance contract: – Improve cooling tower operations– Plumbing fixture retrofits– Install weather-based controllers under Parks Department
management on athletic fields (39 athletic field properties)– Switch from potable water use to reclaimed water where
available (South Austin Soccer Fields and Bartholomew Park baseball fields)
City Facility Conservation Requirements
• Projected water savings:– Peak day water use savings: 0.06 MGD
• Estimated costs to City:• Cost per gallon saved: tbd
Pressure Reduction Program
Problem:• Large number of residential water meters with
pressure over 65 psi in the service area• High pressure leads to higher water use and
faster deterioration of appliances and fixtures • Plumbing Code requires a pressure reduction
valve (PRV) if the pressure is over 80 psi
Pressure Reduction Program
Recommendation:• Require PRVs on new residential properties with
pressure above 65 psi• Rebate for installing PRVs at existing residential
properties with high pressure
Pressure Reduction Program
• Projected water savings:• Peak day water use savings: 0.13 MGD
• Estimated costs to City:• Cost per gallon saved: $0
Winter Leak Detection Program
Problem:• Customers not always aware of high
consumption, often caused by leaks
Recommendation:• Contact customers with high winter consumption
and inform them of the possibility of a leak
Winter Leak Detection Program
• Projected water savings:• Peak day savings after ten years: 0.18 MGD
• Estimated costs:• Cost to the City: $15,000 per year• Cost per gallon saved: $0.83
Outreach Programs
Problem:• Despite extensive marketing efforts, many
citizens are unaware of the City’s water conservation programs
Current Outreach Programs• WaterWise E-Newsletter
– 13,000 subscribers,10 issues/year
• WaterWiseAustin.org
• Bill Stuffers– 10 inserts/year to 200,000 customers
• Media Advertising
• Elementary Education– Dowser Dan (grades 1-4)– Water in Our World (grade 5)
Future Marketing PlanRecommendation:• Water IQ Campaign
– Partnership with LCRA– $100,000 commitment– Includes outdoor, radio, TV, events– Promotes general water awareness
• Program-Oriented Marketing– Increase cross-marketing to past participants– Explore target marketing by area, income– Expand successful current efforts
Future Marketing PlanRecommendation:• Build Water Conservation "Brand"
– Need to increase awareness of City's conservation efforts and programs
– Gradual shift to coordinated look and feel for program materials
• Summer Watering Campaign– Comprehensive media coverage for 5 months– Publicize changes to watering restrictions– Cost: $725,000
Commercial Clothes Washer Standards
Problem:• There are no state or federal efficiency
standards for hard-mount clothes washersSolution:• Amend the plumbing code to require an
efficiency factor for hard-mount single load and multi-load clothes washers
• Require retrofit of existing laundries by date certain
natbdtbdEnhanced Public Education
$0.83$15,0000.2Winter Leak Detection Program
natbd0.06City Facility Conservation Requirementsna$00.13Pressure Reduction Program
4.4 - 4.9Recommended Indoor Strategies
30.9 – 37.2Total 12.13Recommended Outdoor Strategies
$0.13$30,0002.4Atlernative Water Sources (AC condensate, stormwater reuse)
na$00.3Wet Ponds, Ornamental Ponds, & Green Roofs
na$02.5 - 5.3Utility Water Rates
$1.5 - $3$12.5 (one time cost)4 – 8Reclaimed Water Use
$1.25$600,0004.8Reducing Water Loss
Total Cost per gallon
saved
Average Year City
CostSavings (MGD)
top related